Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. South Carolina Public Service Commission

380 S.E.2d 825, 298 S.C. 347, 1989 S.C. LEXIS 135
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided June 5, 1989·No. 23031·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Affirmed pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 23. Our reasons are essentially the same as those of the Circuit Court. We reject the argument that the Court applied the wrong standard of review. See S. C. Code Ann. § 58-9-1450 (1976) (“All orders of the Commission shall be deemed prima facie just and reasonable----”); GTE Sprint Communications Corp. v. Public Serv. Comm’n, 288 S.C. 174, 179, 341 S. E. (2d) 126, 128-29 (1986) (“The Public Service Commission is recognized as the ‘expert’ designated by the legislature to make policy [348]*348determinations regarding utility rates; thus, the role of a court reviewing such decisions is very limited.”). We decline to make any legal distinction between transmission service and distribution service. Any such distinction will have to be made, if at all, by the Public Service Commission or the Legislature.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. South Carolina Public Service Commission, 380 S.E.2d 825, 298 S.C. 347, 1989 S.C. LEXIS 135 (S.C. 1989).

380 S.E.2d 825 (Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. South Carolina Public Service Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

GTE Sprint Communications Corp. v. Public Service Commission
341 S.E.2d 126 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1986)